Sanctuary States: A proposal

[TemplarKormac]

Yeah, I figured as much.

I assume they're high on yours?

Why?

Hmm, because if a law is just it should be allowed to be enforced. For the security and safety of the citizenry. That's the basis of my argument.

Who determines if a law is "just"?

Who? The Supreme Court.

No. The Supreme Court determines whether a law is Constitutional, not "just".

Interesting. So you're saying that there is no definition of what a "just law" is then. That there is no one person or thing that sets that definition...

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Curious... why have a unified system of government, then, when we have parts of that system actively impeding its function?

Because the whole point of Federalism is that different states have different interests.

Then why do we call ourselves a union if we don't strive to act in a unified manner?

We are a union of sovereign states with a limited federal government, by agreement. Immigration policy and enforcement happens to be a designated power of the federal government.

The Democrats are attempting to in time dissolve the agreement.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

The state of California is no more obligated to assist ICE in deporting illegal immigrants than I am obligated to report my neighbor to the police for smoking pot.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

I assume they're high on yours?

Why?

Hmm, because if a law is just it should be allowed to be enforced. For the security and safety of the citizenry. That's the basis of my argument.

Who determines if a law is "just"?

Who? The Supreme Court.

No. The Supreme Court determines whether a law is Constitutional, not "just".

Interesting. So you're saying that there is no definition of what a "just law" is then. That there is no one person or thing that sets that definition...

Basically, yes - that's what I'm saying.

 

[TemplarKormac]

The state of California is no more obligated to assist ICE in deporting illegal immigrants than I am obligated to report my neighbor to the police for smoking pot.

Then based on that position, I can only assume our immigration laws are pointless.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

The state of California is no more obligated to assist ICE in deporting illegal immigrants than I am obligated to report my neighbor to the police for smoking pot.

Then based on that position, I can only assume our immigration laws are pointless.

Well, no. Eventually the courts will get a hold of lawsuits against state financial assistance, access to state services etc. which could easily be construed as invitations specifically attractive to illegal aliens. I'm surprised they haven't been filed already.

Then they will go up the chain to the SCOTUS. I believe the states named in such suits will still not be required to assist in enforcement, but providing state aid to illegals is definitely against federal law.

 

[Coyote]

The state of California is no more obligated to assist ICE in deporting illegal immigrants than I am obligated to report my neighbor to the police for smoking pot.

Then based on that position, I can only assume our immigration laws are pointless.

Well, no. Eventually the courts will get a hold of lawsuits against state financial assistance, access to state services etc. which could easily be construed as invitations specifically attractive to illegal aliens. I'm surprised they haven't been filed already.

Then they will go up the chain to the SCOTUS. I believe the states named in such suits will still not be required to assist in enforcement, but providing state aid to illegals is definitely against federal law.

What federal law?

 

[theDoctorisIn]

The state of California is no more obligated to assist ICE in deporting illegal immigrants than I am obligated to report my neighbor to the police for smoking pot.

Then based on that position, I can only assume our immigration laws are pointless.

Well, no. Eventually the courts will get a hold of lawsuits against state financial assistance, access to state services etc. which could easily be construed as invitations specifically attractive to illegal aliens. I'm surprised they haven't been filed already.

Then they will go up the chain to the SCOTUS. I believe the states named in such suits will still not be required to assist in enforcement, but providing state aid to illegals is definitely against federal law.

This has already gone to the Supreme Court (but the other way around), in regards to education.

Plyler v. Doe - Wikipedia

 

[theDoctorisIn]

The state of California is no more obligated to assist ICE in deporting illegal immigrants than I am obligated to report my neighbor to the police for smoking pot.

Then based on that position, I can only assume our immigration laws are pointless.

Well, no. Eventually the courts will get a hold of lawsuits against state financial assistance, access to state services etc. which could easily be construed as invitations specifically attractive to illegal aliens. I'm surprised they haven't been filed already.

Then they will go up the chain to the SCOTUS. I believe the states named in such suits will still not be required to assist in enforcement, but providing state aid to illegals is definitely against federal law.

Who do you suspect will file these "lawsuits"? What claims would they be, and what damages would be sought?

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

The state of California is no more obligated to assist ICE in deporting illegal immigrants than I am obligated to report my neighbor to the police for smoking pot.

Then based on that position, I can only assume our immigration laws are pointless.

Well, no. Eventually the courts will get a hold of lawsuits against state financial assistance, access to state services etc. which could easily be construed as invitations specifically attractive to illegal aliens. I'm surprised they haven't been filed already.

Then they will go up the chain to the SCOTUS. I believe the states named in such suits will still not be required to assist in enforcement, but providing state aid to illegals is definitely against federal law.

What federal law?

For starters:

Immigration and Nationality Act, INA 274A
Title 8 of the United States Code, Section 1324, various subsections.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

The state of California is no more obligated to assist ICE in deporting illegal immigrants than I am obligated to report my neighbor to the police for smoking pot.

Then based on that position, I can only assume our immigration laws are pointless.

Well, no. Eventually the courts will get a hold of lawsuits against state financial assistance, access to state services etc. which could easily be construed as invitations specifically attractive to illegal aliens. I'm surprised they haven't been filed already.

Then they will go up the chain to the SCOTUS. I believe the states named in such suits will still not be required to assist in enforcement, but providing state aid to illegals is definitely against federal law.

This has already gone to the Supreme Court (but the other way around), in regards to education.

Plyler v. Doe - Wikipedia

Yes, but as you know, the SCOTUS does make mistakes, and there is no such thing as settled law.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

The state of California is no more obligated to assist ICE in deporting illegal immigrants than I am obligated to report my neighbor to the police for smoking pot.

Then based on that position, I can only assume our immigration laws are pointless.

Well, no. Eventually the courts will get a hold of lawsuits against state financial assistance, access to state services etc. which could easily be construed as invitations specifically attractive to illegal aliens. I'm surprised they haven't been filed already.

Then they will go up the chain to the SCOTUS. I believe the states named in such suits will still not be required to assist in enforcement, but providing state aid to illegals is definitely against federal law.

Who do you suspect will file these "lawsuits"? What claims would they be, and what damages would be sought?

I will ingest great amounts of spice, exercise prescience, and get back to you.

 

[Issa]

I would love to be around and see California independent from the rest of useless states. I think California will do much better. But would be nice to put a stop on immigration from those states till we know what the hell is going on.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

The state of California is no more obligated to assist ICE in deporting illegal immigrants than I am obligated to report my neighbor to the police for smoking pot.

Then based on that position, I can only assume our immigration laws are pointless.

Well, no. Eventually the courts will get a hold of lawsuits against state financial assistance, access to state services etc. which could easily be construed as invitations specifically attractive to illegal aliens. I'm surprised they haven't been filed already.

Then they will go up the chain to the SCOTUS. I believe the states named in such suits will still not be required to assist in enforcement, but providing state aid to illegals is definitely against federal law.

This has already gone to the Supreme Court (but the other way around), in regards to education.

Plyler v. Doe - Wikipedia

Yes, but as you know, the SCOTUS does make mistakes, and there is no such thing as settled law.

By all means, you should hang your hat on that.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

The state of California is no more obligated to assist ICE in deporting illegal immigrants than I am obligated to report my neighbor to the police for smoking pot.

Then based on that position, I can only assume our immigration laws are pointless.

Well, no. Eventually the courts will get a hold of lawsuits against state financial assistance, access to state services etc. which could easily be construed as invitations specifically attractive to illegal aliens. I'm surprised they haven't been filed already.

Then they will go up the chain to the SCOTUS. I believe the states named in such suits will still not be required to assist in enforcement, but providing state aid to illegals is definitely against federal law.

Who do you suspect will file these "lawsuits"? What claims would they be, and what damages would be sought?

I will ingest great amounts of spice, exercise prescience, and get back to you.

If you're so convinced that they're going to happen, I don't imagine it should be hard to come up with a hypothetical as to how you think it will play out.

 

[danielpalos]

Curious... why have a unified system of government, then, when we have parts of that system actively impeding its function?

Is this a trick question?

We don't have a unitary form of government. We have a federal form of government.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

The state of California is no more obligated to assist ICE in deporting illegal immigrants than I am obligated to report my neighbor to the police for smoking pot.

Then based on that position, I can only assume our immigration laws are pointless.

Well, no. Eventually the courts will get a hold of lawsuits against state financial assistance, access to state services etc. which could easily be construed as invitations specifically attractive to illegal aliens. I'm surprised they haven't been filed already.

Then they will go up the chain to the SCOTUS. I believe the states named in such suits will still not be required to assist in enforcement, but providing state aid to illegals is definitely against federal law.

This has already gone to the Supreme Court (but the other way around), in regards to education.

Plyler v. Doe - Wikipedia

Yes, but as you know, the SCOTUS does make mistakes, and there is no such thing as settled law.

By all means, you should hang your hat on that.

I do.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

The state of California is no more obligated to assist ICE in deporting illegal immigrants than I am obligated to report my neighbor to the police for smoking pot.

Then based on that position, I can only assume our immigration laws are pointless.

Well, no. Eventually the courts will get a hold of lawsuits against state financial assistance, access to state services etc. which could easily be construed as invitations specifically attractive to illegal aliens. I'm surprised they haven't been filed already.

Then they will go up the chain to the SCOTUS. I believe the states named in such suits will still not be required to assist in enforcement, but providing state aid to illegals is definitely against federal law.

Who do you suspect will file these "lawsuits"? What claims would they be, and what damages would be sought?

I will ingest great amounts of spice, exercise prescience, and get back to you.

If you're so convinced that they're going to happen, I don't imagine it should be hard to come up with a hypothetical as to how you think it will play out.

Hypotheticals are worth this much.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Then based on that position, I can only assume our immigration laws are pointless.

Well, no. Eventually the courts will get a hold of lawsuits against state financial assistance, access to state services etc. which could easily be construed as invitations specifically attractive to illegal aliens. I'm surprised they haven't been filed already.

Then they will go up the chain to the SCOTUS. I believe the states named in such suits will still not be required to assist in enforcement, but providing state aid to illegals is definitely against federal law.

Who do you suspect will file these "lawsuits"? What claims would they be, and what damages would be sought?

I will ingest great amounts of spice, exercise prescience, and get back to you.

If you're so convinced that they're going to happen, I don't imagine it should be hard to come up with a hypothetical as to how you think it will play out.

Hypotheticals are worth this much.

Imaginary lawsuits that you can't even begin to describe are worth even less.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

The state of California is no more obligated to assist ICE in deporting illegal immigrants than I am obligated to report my neighbor to the police for smoking pot.

Then based on that position, I can only assume our immigration laws are pointless.

You assume wrong.

The enforcement of immigration laws is no different than the enforcement of any other laws: a right to due process, a presumption of innocence.

And our immigration laws are Federal laws, the purview of Federal authorities, not state and local authorities.

Federal authorities cannot compel states and local jurisdictions to enforce Federal laws (see, e.g., Printz v. United States (1997)).

Hence the myth of ‘sanctuary cities’ – that state and local jurisdictions might elect to not use their resources to arrest and detain undocumented immigrants is perfectly appropriate and legal, particularly with limited law enforcement resources.

Consequently, no ‘proposals’ are warranted – Federal authorities will continue to pursue those who allegedly entered the country absent authorization, local authorities will assist when requested, as the always have; but there is no ‘requirement’ that local jurisdictions unilaterally pursue those undocumented.